The recent (7th March 2025) announcement by Esri regarding the integration of Google’s Photorealistic 3D tiles into the ArcGIS platform represents a significant advancement for GIS users on the platform, and particularly those interested in building urban digital twins.
This new 3D basemap will provide 3D views of over “2,500 cities across 49 countries”, making it easier for users to access detailed and realistic representations of the real world. It will provide detailed and realistic representations of the real world, simplifying the process for users by integrating it as an additional layer within the ArcGIS platform like other basemapping. I think many people who have been watching this space will not be surprised and happy to see it implemented.
While this development potentially underscores a pivotal shift towards the adoption of 3D as the standard paradigm for spatial analysis and project execution within the Esri platform, it is important to recognize that this is part of a gradual expansion into new markets and products.
Esri make no mention of whether this will be an additional cost, I suspect not, Esri has historically been quite keen to add new data and features as part of a user’s subscription.
Basemaps are important
Basemaps are a fundamental layer within a map, providing essential visual and geographic context for GIS projects.
The addition of new 3D basemaps will enable some ArcGIS users to focus on the narrative or analytical side of their projects with realistic and relatable depictions of the real world. It’s not rocket science here but lowering costs and making it easier enables us to focus on what’s important.
One hope for me here is that these layers will be accessible by plugins for game engines like Unreal Engine and Unity! I think this is a massive space for geospatial companies in general and one where there is definite growth.
Don’t get excited… “Democratization of 3D GIS Technology”
The collaboration between Esri and Google does not necessarily herald a transformative era for 3D GIS technology but rather it is an incremental update that makes it accessible to a broader audience over time.
This is what Esri does well and for a lot of things, first it makes things possible to do but only for those with more technical knowledge. Gauging interest and demand it does a deal or makes things easier for the rest of us ArcGIS users to implement.
No-code solutions are great for the vast majority of users and I include myself in that, I honestly look forward to saying “it’s just another layer”!
Pretty visualisations for all?
I love simple diagrammatic 3D models and visualisations, I prefer less distractions and this probably comes from my urban planning background. Equally, I also rarely have a data budget big enough to cover 3D acquisition so cheaper simple building models have been my preference.
The ability to show a more realistic view of an urban area is compelling for stakeholders, both professional and public. This is evidenced by the adoption of 3D models in cities like Nottingham in the UK. It seems now the technical and cost barriers are lowering for ArcGIS users, and I suspect this will mean a wider adoption of 3D for local authorities in the UK (provided there is coverage).
Here in lies the problem or opportunity: Users I suspect will be reliant on Google acquisition priorities here. So, if you want up-to-date city models you will need to be lucky or have money to source from fantastic data providers like Bluesky Worldwide.
Overall, I think this is good news for everyone, those with limited budgets will benefit from Google 3D basemaps allowing them to experiment and experience 3D without getting budget approvals. Also, it will allow people to prove the utility of 3D, risk free and perhaps enabling discussions about additional newer acquisition of 3D basemaps. A risk for data providers might be that budgets will be harder to obtain for 3D acquisition because there already is a dataset they can use.
On balance I am optimistic I think that more availability doesn’t dimmish demand it will increase it as users will see it as a necessity as opposed to what we have now as a ‘nice to have’.
What has this got to do with Urban Digital Twins?
To be honest this doesn’t have to mean anything for those of us developing and working on Urban Digital Twins! Data and basemapping is one small part of the overall process and creation of digital twins. It is just another layer, and really it is what you do with it that counts. While 3D basemapping is a crucial component of urban digital twins, it is essential to balance it with considerations of data provenance, timeliness, live links to the real world, and most importantly, outcomes.
Leave a Reply